ReviewSpine surgery and related research2017
Classification and scoring systems for metastatic spine tumors: a literature review.
Review in Spine surgery and related research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Incidence, epidemiology, radiology, and classification of metastatic spine tumors: WFNS Spine Committee recommendations.Neurosurgical review · 2024Pooled it
- Prognostic scores for survival as decisional support for surgery in spinal metastases: a performance assessment systematic review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Treatment approaches for multiple Myeloma vertebral column lesions - Results from an international survey distributed to the AO spine knowledge forum tumor.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Determinants of Overall and Readmission-Free Survival in Patients with Metastatic Epidural Spinal Cord Compression.Cancers · 2024Article
- What are the factors contributing to symptomatic local recurrence in metastatic spinal cord compression after surgery?Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Article
- Nutritional Status Is Associated With Survival Following Spinal Surgery in Patients With Metastatic Spinal Tumors.Cureus · 2023Article
- Primary Osseous Malignancies of the Spine.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- The outcome of spine metastatic after surgery: a case series.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
- Management of pain in patients with bone metastases.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Intradural metastasis to the cauda equina found as the initial presentation of breast cancer: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAccurate evaluation of metastasis and life prognosis is essential for selecting a suitable therapeutic strategy for metastatic spine tumors owing to limitations in treatment options. For this purpose, various classification, evaluation, and scoring systems have been developed.
methodsClassification, evaluation, and scoring systems for metastatic spine tumors reported to date were identified by performing a literature search on PubMed. We reviewed the most cited classifications and scorings before 2009, and all classifications and scorings reported after 2010 from the search results.
resultsSix classifications and 23 scorings were reviewed. The classification/evaluation methods are divided into 1) anatomical classification/evaluation methods, 2) evaluation methods for neurological symptoms/instability, and 3) scoring systems for predicting life expectancy. The first 2 were useful for the planning and evaluation of surgical indications. Scoring systems for life prognosis also permitted rough prediction of the outcomes and were useful for the selection of a suitable treatment. However, variation of the patient background, diversity of adopted prognostic factors, and the absence of scoring systems that could predict the outcome with an accuracy of 90% or higher introduced some limitations.
conclusionThe identified classification, evaluation, and scoring systems have been generally useful for treatment strategies. However, we emphasize the necessity of multidisciplinary development and revision of classification and evaluation methods to adapt to the prolongation of survival associated with increased diversity and improvement of treatment options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.